A modest proposal for Senate filibuster reform

Filibuster reform is necessary to have a functioning government, but we want to also protect the minority’s right to oppose legislation it feels is detrimental to the country. Here is a reform that makes the filibuster less convenient but retains the 41-vote minority’s right to stop legislation: Simply change the rule so that the filibuster supporters need to be in attendance while a talking filibuster is happening on the Senate floor. This hits the senators where it actually matters, because when the senators are on the floor listening to their colleagues (a kind of torture in itself), they can’t go to their offices to make fundraising calls. Any senator can call a vote, and if 41 senators are not there to sustain the filibuster, it fails. This keeps minority rights while forcing the minority to actually sacrifice something of value, their time, to sustain it.

Sherwood Wang, Nederland

This letter was published in the Nov. 26 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow DPLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

The probem with the modern filibuster is that it doesn’t even get to the Senate floor.
No long-winded, hours-long speeches, no all-nighters.
Instead, the Republicans say they’ll filibuster, and the Democrats cave in, and don’t schedule votes.
The Republicans get what they want without a single word of debate being made.
I’d call the Republicans’ bluff: Tell them if they want to filibuster, they’d better show up and wear out their vocal chords.

Guest

Good suggestion, Pete. that was the way the filibuster used to be, and it didn’t happen very often.

Anonymous

Thank you.

Anonymous

My understanding is that filibusters no longer require holding the floor by speaking. There’s no bluff to call.

Anonymous

That’s true, and that’s why the filibuster is abused. It takes no effort to impose it.

Anonymous

Exactly! That’s why it used so frivolously.

Anonymous

But it doesn’t work that way any more. I’m not sure how it works, but it’s not the required long winded speech and having a forum, as the writer suggests. All the Republicans have to do is indicate they’ll filibuster and that’s all it takes.

thor

Editing yours like I did peterpi’s- “But it doesn’t work that way any more. I’m not sure how it works, but
it’s not the required long winded speech and having a forum, as the
writer suggests. All the Republicans [or Democrats] have to do is indicate they’ll
filibuster and that’s all it takes.”

thor

For fairness, let’s rephrase your post- “The probem with the modern filibuster is that it doesn’t even get to the Senate floor.
No long-winded, hours-long speeches, no all-nighters.
Instead, the Republicans [and Democrats] say they’ll filibuster, and the Democrats [or Republicans] cave in, and don’t schedule votes.
The Republicans [or Democrats] get what they want without a single word of debate being made.
I’d call the Republicans’ [or Democrats] bluff: Tell them if they want to filibuster, they’d better show up and wear out their vocal chords.

ginico

Agree, we need to return to what filibusters used to be – bring in the beds and make all of those who support the filibuster stay and keep trying to convince the public of their side of the issue.

Anonymous

All the usual suspects are going to make the argument “for” the filibuster because right now it works for them. Just as the EC worked for them in 2000, what works, what ever makes them “win” is what matters. It’s about winning and losing. They didn’t learn from this election that their message is about ‘self deportation” wasn’t “winning” over Latinos, so they want to “win” Latino votes by “looking more Latino” with the likes of Rubio. Never mind trying to understand how Latinos feel or what they need., they just want to “win” their vote, not represent their values.
So we can expect to see this filibuster reform fall to defeat, as right not is “wins” for them. Now the reverse happening – for example Romney winning the popular vote and Obama the EC – would of gotten them to dump the EC in a heart beat. But they know that the Dems would never sink to their level and use the filibuster as a political tool to kill anything and everything remotely Democratic. And don’t make us pull out the facts and prove this!

thor

If you did pull out the facts, they would show that, over the years, Democrats are just as capable as Republicans at abusing the filibuster.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.